Chet

Tones are excellent, as well as the cropping. The expression is very powerfull as well

The crop does not work at all. It looks like the type of photo aunt Emma would have taken, chopping the head off, and uncle Ed is kind of pissed off that anyone would dare take his photo.

Fantastic.

I disagree with those above who complain about the framing or lack of highlights in the eyes. For me, anyway it is those dark eyes that make the image-they add a great deal of depth and impact not to mention a certain spookyiness

 

i like it

Leaving so many things unanswered is saying much more in the case of this picture. This is a very good portrait and you should be very proud of it. So much is told in this understated picture - bravo

I'll never understand why so much of society today needs to be hit with glitz in order

for their attention to be had.

 

I'm sure this man could have been successfully photographed in an environment, or

with some sort of prop. And yes, I'm sure we would have learned more about him in

such a photo. But does that mean that that is the only way he can be successfully

photographed? Of course it doesn't. Whats wrong with photographing someone for

their physical state, and nothing more. We have bodies-why not document them.

And why not do it regardless of, and without attention to, age, life experience, or

character?

 

I realize that alot of people out there are constantly seeking some sort of higher

meaning in photography and art in general. To them, this photo will leave so many

questions unanswered, and thus leave them unfulfilled. Personally, I love the

simplicity, the lack of distractions, the near scientific nature in which he was

photographed. His shirt looks dirty and worn out. His dark eyes look the way many

older peoples eyes look-dark. This is life. Its asking to be recorded in a way that

doesn't deceive.

 

For this, I congradulate Jill on a most rare occurance on this web site-an honest

photograph.

 

cheers

I am NOT a specialist of studio portrait and technics. As a simple viewer my feeling are mixed:

The model and the crop match and are quite interesting indeed (although classic kind of studio crop) as well as the design chosen for shirt.

The soft rendering is accentuated by the yellowish tones used here, clear and uniform background, the light which flatten detail and relief. Overall impression of dullness and lifeness ... there no much life in those eyes, no much shadow to accentuate lines or relief.

I would have eventually go for BW, add more sharpeness and contrast and possibly review the studio lighting effect.... IMHO.

If my aunt Emma had taken this shot, her finger would have covered the lens and all you'd see is Chet's overexposed ear.

Man, I don't get the crop complaints. I think crops like this work great! And the eyes are great as well. I hope I don't offend anyone by saying this, but it looks like he's got cataracts or some similar ocular malady. Whatever it is, there is a hopeful but resigned pain in there.

Nicely done!

Nothing more is needed to tell the story of Chet. The folder title says it all - Assisted Living. Chet has lost his independence, he is now living in an institution. He is tired, the spark has been lost from his eyes. One reviewer above asks what job Chet used to do, but that's the whole point - it doesn't matter anymore; Chet's past is no longer relevant to anyone. Apart from (hopefully) some kids or grandkids who visit him on weekends, no-one really knows Chet exists. Of course he has no spark left in his eyes. Of course there are no props to put him in "context". There is no context. I love the shot, I love the crop, but it still makes me feel sad, and there's not too many shots on this site that can get a reaction like that from me. Well done.

People bring a lot of diverse expectations to the viewing of portraits and it is very unlikely that any portrait will satisfy everyone. Webster's defines the portrait very simply as a picture of a person showing the face. I think the idea has been elaborated much more complexly by photographers and that the operational definition now includes the idea that the subject of a portrait is aware of the photographer's attention and has in some sense assented to the recording of a likeness. This implies that the subject shares to some extent in the production of the image and determines what facets of appearance and personality will be revealed. In the case of an actor's head shot, for instance, the subject will most likely want to convey a sense of pleasant maleability that is appealling to film directors, though not generally to the world at large.

    In Jill's shot of Chet, one perceives that Chet has agreed to surrender a good deal of control over the image to Jill and to reveal his exterior self without reservation. His expression also shows some inner complexity and ambiguity, partly because of the abstraction resulting from the tight cropping and composition chosen by the photographer. It is a great collaboration between subject and photographer.

Seems like a very usual passport photo in itself (other than the sligtly unusual crop). I don't think there is much thought given to lighting bearing in mind of the "studio nature" of the shot. Other members have already pointed out the lack of details in the eye.

 

I personally like the facial profile of this subject - the protruding ear, and weary look.

 

Showing environment - i think totally unnecessary - plain background is not a problem and indeed it helps focusing more of the facial profile but unfortunately i don't think this one makes the job done.

 

Crop - this is very much personal liking - honestly not my taste for this crop.

 

My English is very limited, i have looked up Oxford but could not find the word "Chet" - would appreciate if Jill or other members could give me some tips :)

I'm very much of the opinion that the crop doesn't work. Its too much and too

distracting. The fact that its being talked about this much is a problem. I think that

the subject is interesting enough himself. I don't care for the category of assisted

living for this individual photograph - maybe thats what the photographer was

studying, but this individual is many more things.

Excuse me for not reading the entire thread - I don't have time right now -, but this MAY OR MAY NOT be a studio portraot. Looks more like a studio-like outdoor portrait to me... What am I missing here ?

How do the Elves or how does anyone know for sure that this picture was taken in studio ? Was it stated somewhere...?

I'm not saying I don't like it, just I see no evidence at all that this fits the "studio" theme of the week... This kind of lighting could be obtained by bounced flash but I see no direct light pointed at the subject if I check his eyes, and therefore, the same portrait could be achieved outdoors - and perhaps this one was...

Marc,

I think you're missing the completely blown out background. If you know a way to do this without a white back drop, please share.

I'm sharing...:-)

Use the sky as backdrop, put the subject in the shade with a couple of white boards around, expose for the face, you get an absolutely white background. OR... Use a wall lit by the sun as a backdrop, subject in the shade, and do the same, exposing for the face: same result.

You get a pure white background each time your background is over-exposed by about 5 f-stops compared to the face - no matter at all where and how you do it.

And if you like, you can also make a white wall appear black, simply by having it about 5 f-stops darker than the main subject.

So, again I ask, where's the evidence of this being a studio shot at all ?

Ordinarily I'd be the first to point out the typical, cliche', 'every pore in the skin emphasized' B/W shot of an elderly individual. Like we haven't seen enough of those.

 

However, I disagree with some of the comments above in that respect, because I don't think this shot falls under this category, at least in a artistic sense. I can't quite explain it, but this shot is more of a study of form and outward emotion and not texture.

 

I find the compostion, form and lighting to be neither good nor bad, but simply very interesting and a unique study.

Yes, the crop is interesting and I like the composition. What I don't like is the

lighting or the subject. The lighting looks like a passport photo, all the detail is

there but, do we really want to see all that detail?.....especially in an aged

person. To have a lack of environment in a portrait works only when the

subject has an interesting expression and lighting that enhances that

expression, this has neither. Would I want to hang this picture on my wall if

this was my grandfather? No.

at first, this photo looks like many I've seen before. The crop is not original and can be found employed to a more dramatic effect in the work of Rene Asmussen or Chris Blaszcyzk. yes, the photo would benefit from more contrast and sharpness. this are all good points, but they miss the uniqueness of this shot. If you look closely, you'll notice that the right half of his face (his right) seems to be paralyzed and expressionless, while the left half of his face reveals the warm smile of a much more youthful, expressive man. Cover the right side of his face w/ your hand, then alternate to see exactly what I'm talking about. To me, this photo reveals the triumph of this man's warm spirit over the physical limitations of old age. Yes, the wrinkles of time shots are cliche and can be easily found in the portfolios of many photographers. Those photos are pictures of time consolidated by wrinkles and strain. For those individuals, their visages are in harmony with their seniority. The photo of Chet, in contrast, expresses a different theme: the struggle to hold onto that spark of life--of passion--in the dusk of life, as time pulls the curtain across the stage in his closing years.

Okay, still looking for an evidence that this is a studio shot, and hopefully the photographer will be kind enough to tell us that - but not too early in the week, let the suspense rise...:-)

Besides that, what do I think about the photo itself ?

Well, first of all, I find rather insulting the comments I read here that this picture would be lit like "a passport photo". I mean, yes, the lighting is flat, with no volumes or shadows, but there are tons of advertising shots - for example - in the same lighting style. We can of course prefer another lighting style, and generally speaking, this kind of lighting TENDS to bore me a little as well... BUT... each lighting style is meant to be understood. If we immediately assume that the photographer did not want this picture to be exactly what he's got, we COULD be right, but we COULD also be UNFAIR to him. So, how decide what this flat lighting is worth ? Well, I'd say: let's try to understand WHY the photographer may have wanted this "flat", "shadowless", "dull" lighting, and this background...

Here are my answers to these questions:

1) Having a flat lighting and a pure white background is generally meant to attract attention on the subject himself, and more often than not on his expression - i.e. his eyes. As Kelly L. put's it, it's a "clinical" approach to the subject. Let's see this in the context of the folder, and its subject justify imo perfectly a "clinical" approach.

2) The light and composition show us FACTS, no flowery set-up, no context: a human being, old; "no future" is another comment I read that made a lot of sense to me; nobody around; nowhere; nothing but a person. We are left to read his eyes to know anything about him. No drama, no interpretation by the photographer, no lighting emphasis, take-it-or-leave-it kind of portrait. Even the expression is up to you to read, as it is very open to interpretation.

Now does this approach succeed or was there more DRAMA needed ? How about side lighting to emphasize textures of the skin, and get a shadow on one half of the face, etc ? Well, all that is of course possible - and is more my personal taste -, but as Kelly said, this portrait is trying to be honest - i.e to stick to facts, without interpreting them. I respect this attempt for the reasons stated above.

End of the day, does it work for me ? Yes. But I've seen much better in this particular category of portraits - yes, I'm talking about clinical portraits that are more effective, for me, than this one. This lighting leads me to the eyes of the person, and I like what I see there: the expression is interesting. But the expression tells me little after a while, and therefore the picture will after a while cease to interest me, and I'll be back asking to know more aout him. There are portraits in this category, equally "dull" - a dullness that IS imo one of several appropriate approach -, that will fascinate me endlessly, because the eyes will tell me more and more when I'll delve into them. I can see nevertheless how someone could delve in this man's eyes for a long period of time, though... Just not me. But I like it. The eyes are beautiful and suggest a long life going to end soon - that's how I understand the crop of the face as well, by the way... This man is on the way to the other side... I understand all this, but I don't really FEEL it myself.

Overall, it's a courageous image if we assume for a moment that the photographer intended to get this "dull" image as it is shown here. I find it to be a very interesting image for a POW discussion, precisely because it leaves all doors open for you to see what you will in these eyes - or not. The photographer portrayed the subject, really, and tried to stay out of the interpretative process. He tried not to influence us in ant way - no emphasis proposed, of any kind, no truth revealed. And yet, it talks to some of us, me included to somme extent. Interesting, courageous photo. And honest, yes. But do the eyes deliver as much intensity as the simple treatment requires ? Well, that's for each of us to assess individually. I think reading expressions is the most subjective of all "arts".

Side-note: this picture can easily be considered as the most unoriginal of all portraits on this site, but I see it as VERY original, precisely because it relies on nothing original or aesthetical or fancy at all, and that way manages to convey a feeling of nothingness.

I have not posted my portrait shots, Mainly because I do not have a confidence about them or know how to determine if they are 'interesting' or not...however...in my opinion...1) straight on or cropped? Had this study not been cropped in this style it would have given little more than a senior with an interesting face by virtue of being elderly, so YES, the crop works. 2)Questions? Of course questions are a good thing. Curiosity is the cornerstone of learning and interest. If a photo is more 'simple' in rendering the subject becomes more necessary...the questions left within the photo create more interest for me. 3)Unanswered? Do we look at photos with the intent of questions? Must they give us answers. In the realm of art I would think not, art moves us emotionally, answer that. 4) Photojournalism in its truist sense is not art, it is recording history and as such, it must convey truths, not tell stories, hopefully.

This photo is a good exercise for myself in that I will now look at my own protrait studies and determine if they have 'gained' value in my amature eyes or if I can make them more interesting through the grey scale and/or cropping. I do appreciate how the elves are encouraging me to examine photography on deeper levels than I have before.

And Jill, when I view the balance of your folders, I get a stronger 'feel' of and for your art and appreciate the single shots more. You do capture a 'something' in your protraits. Thank You.

it's not 'in the eyes' in this case. I think the extra focus on the eyes might be an artifact of people looking at too many of those wrinkled eye shots. personally, his pupils look strangely like slits rather than ovals. the life isn't in his eyes, it's in his smile and the incredible contrast w/i his face. I'm not talking about shading here, either.

I feel my first comment was not totally fair to the photographer. I realized afterward that this picture belongs to a folder 'assisted living' so that can explain perfectly the choice of the author for dullness and lifeness lighting, contrast and tone to accentuate expression.

But I am not convinced yet about the studio issue here. Sounds more hospital to me without much of special lighting effect and make-up and just plain white wall as natural background...

Frame works with me, so does the expression on the face of the model. I agree with Marc, it does not look like a "typical" studio portrait.

 

I like this portrait if I forget all the studio trickies. Anyway, congratulations!

No prop, no background, no colors to distract. Total attention of the viewer is concentrated on the face of the model. The photographer has succeeded in his aim. This non conventional composition also adds new dimension to the photograph. Kudos!!!!!!!!

I think it's a great photo - slightly controversial positioning and therefore a very interesting choice for POW.

 

I like the eyes. They have a steely intensity about them that speaks volumes about the body aging while the mind stays sharp. For this reason I think I would have chosen to centre on the eyes and crop in closer. However, I do find the positioning very interesting, and it is something I plan to play around with myself.

 

A great photo. Well done.

I find that a lot of times, people tend to read into portrait images what they want to see. Particularly, I am referring to a comment earlier in the thread supposing that the photographer chose a dull lighting to represent the lack of life left in the subject. Personally, I find that idea is really reaching for a more difficult explanation than the truth. I feel that the tiny bit more light that I would have like was sacrificed while making the scan, or, this was the best lighting that the image maker could produce under whatever circumstances she was faced with and she was happy with it. The simplist explanation is usually the correct one.

 

Whether or not this portrait was produced in a "studio", it was certainly posed and there was some set up involved and is certainly more than a "candid" portrait.

 

Personally, I think this image is very good. Would I hang this on my wall if this was my grandfather? Absolutely.

 

How would you go about making a more interesting portrait of Chet? I see personality in his face. I see photographic skill in its representation. If Jill had just centered him up in the frame there would be an outcry discussing the boredom associated with a centrally framed subject. Jill realized that, made a bold cropping decision, and got the payoff in the form of this very interesting portrait.